The Law Journal's Photographer Gets Rare Images From Inside a Federal Courtroom
Broadcasting or taking pictures from federal courtrooms has been prohibited since 1946., but in certain rare occasions, federal court administrators allow photographers to come inside to get pictures of courtrooms that much of the public never see.
February 07, 2022 at 06:17 PM
2 minute read
SlideshowIn New York's state courts, journalists are generally allowed to take photos and video of court proceedings, so long as they don't capture jurors during trials or otherwise disrupt proceedings. But the federal courts have long been a black box for visual journalism. Broadcasting or taking pictures from federal courtrooms has been prohibited since 1946. Through the years, federal courts have studied the issue at certain points and even launched a pilot program in 2011 to allow cameras in the courtrooms of 14 U.S. district courts. But the vast majority of the 94 U.S. district courts—including the four in New York—still have bans in place. The only images that are allowed to be disseminated from federal courtrooms are the works of sketch artists. Thus, photographers and camera operators are relegated to the exterior, often forcing them to wait in extreme temperatures to shoot images of press conferences or lawyers and litigants coming to and leaving the courthouse. However, on certain rare occasions, federal court administrators allow photographers to come inside to get pictures of courtrooms that much of the public never see. The Eastern District of New York recently invited the Law Journal into its courthouse in Downtown Brooklyn for a look at COVID-19 retrofits installed in one of its courtrooms. Opened in 2006, the 15-story Theodore Roosevelt Federal Courthouse was designed by architect César Pelli and is one of the newest courthouses in the city.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllCourt System's Franklin H. Williams Judicial Commission Presents Annual Diversity Awards
Pelotons, Gym, Napping Rooms: Latest Law Firm Renovations 'Draw People' In with Home Amenities
4 minute readDonning the 'Dissent Chain': Asian American Judges Group Honors Judicial Leaders With Unorthodox Trophies
85-Year-Old New York Court Officer Retires After 62 Years of Service
Trending Stories
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250